Severe Response Degradation

Daniel Senie dts at
Wed Apr 28 13:39:37 UTC 1999

Derek Balling wrote:
> >This is what we are currently seeing. Unfortunately @Home does not do
> >reverse dns for their routers so I am going by their helpdesk's descriptions
> >of locations. I do know that the router is in SF but could not get an exact
> >location due to @home claiming it to be a sprint issue. This also brings
> >back the conversation of RFC1918 addressing and the problems it can cause
> >when troubleshooting response issues.
> I haven't actually tried this, but I have been told that if you actually
> use @Home's DNS servers and query the RFC1918 addresses for the routers, it
> will give you back "intelligent" names.

I've tried it, without success. If anyone finds a particular DNS server
in their realm which does resolve these, please let me know. They seem
to treat the info as trade secrets... very annoying.

Considering the large chunk of 24/8 they have, I can't imagine why they
had to use RFC 1918 addresses throughout their infrastructure. When I
raised issues about this (just after getting a T1 to their network),
they had no answers other than that since they chose an MTU of 1500
bytes for all their links, they didn't think path MTU discovery would be
an issue.

Daniel Senie                                        dts at
Amaranth Networks Inc.  

More information about the NANOG mailing list